This is the procedure I use for releasing ScriptCraft - an open source side-project which is not in any way mission-critical to anyone but still has enough users who care about its reliability...
After I've done some testing and verified there are no major bugs and the documentation is up to date, I create a new release on GitHub. GitHub is great, they don't get pissy about your project existing in other locations. This is a perfectly grown-up attitude and one which all websites should adopt. GitHub don't mind or care if my source-code and binaries are also available in their own dedicated website (they are http://scriptcraftjs.org ). This is totally commendable and one of the reasons I love github.
Next I upload the binaries and release notes to http://scriptcraftjs.org/download - ScriptCraft's own dedicated website. It's important that ScriptCraft has its own home after all.
Finally I upload the binaries and release notes to Bukkit's site. Bukkit are a bit funny about posting links to anywhere but bukkit. They want to be the canonical source for all bukkit plugins and don't like if you link to the project's own site or github. Which makes http://dev.bukkit.org/bukkit-plugins/ my last port of call when I release a new version of the plugin.
Having 3 different locations from which ScriptCraft can be downloaded means I can hit a wider audience. Not everyone uses http://dev.bukkit.org/ so providing the binaries and release notes elsewhere is important. Plus, if the Bukkit team do get cranky about cross-linking (hey it's the web!) to non-bukkit properties and decide to remove ScriptCraft altogether, well it's no big deal. I can't understand the thinking behind forbidding such links, it reeks of silo thinking.